How do government ideologies shape anti-trafficking directives? Analysing populist parties influence in and out of government

Abstract

When looking to analyse state’s anti-trafficking strategies, usually it’s analysed from an International Relations perspective on why states comply with international treaties such as the UN Anti-Trafficking Protocol, and the reasons given are coercion by other states or a strategic decision made by states to enhance their reputation and demonstrate their commitment. However, it is important to analyse trafficking in human beings beyond an International Relations perspective as to get an understanding of what problematics may be influencing trafficking policies within a state. However true it may be that a state’s behaviour is influenced by the international system, domestic factors also play a role. Government ideologies shape how policies are implemented within a state. The question becomes how do government ideologies shape specifically anti-trafficking directives? As certain political groups project themselves as vindicating for social justice and human trafficking tends to target vulnerable groups, we could expect a correlation between these parties’ strong political representation in the cabinet or parliament and more or stronger anti-trafficking directives. On the other hand, other parties’ ideologies have a more populist and nationalist trend to it which might result in harsher migration policies which leave further vulnerable the already marginalized groups and have an overall negative impact on anti-trafficking policies, particularly regarding victims’ protection.